, that the government may be tapping directly into the backbone of big companies likefacebook,google, ect..these are the programmatic matters that led to the discussion, reform base we hear about over the summer, and they raise fundamental questions, not just about fisa as enacted, but about whether the transparency and oversight mechanisms that have are risen under that are effective, and so the idea behind our briefing today is to give you guys both a sense of what those transparency and oversight mechanisms are and why they either are or are not or are debatably working, and, indeed, since there's so much call for reform in some parts of congress these days, we give you a sense of the merits or lack thereof of the competing reform proposals as we see hearings, for example, in the senate judiciary committee, and next tuesday, the following monday before the privacy and civil rights oversight board, and the short version is, right, now is a time ripe for discussion about whether fisa needs fixing, and if so, how to fix it, and so hence this briefing to sort of talk about where we are an

adds these thoughts. how can itcrash,google, hits, youtube get more per hour than the aca site did all day. > it's part of the reinvision rated effort to fix these problems. a tech surge where the administration says they're of experts ots bringing them onboard. they're not telling reporters where they are. to the people to help them fix the federal website. line, hello. ured >> hi, how are you doing? >> fine, thank you. > i just think this is so funny. what do people do before you had a computer? that all theselves time in the newsroom. >> take care of your business. ways you can r sign up for this law instead of a website. ridiculous. so that's all i have to say. i think it's funny. read, of the stories i though, is for the people calling in on the phone lines promoted is the phone ne lines are signed for guidance. >> some of the operators are having a hard time working system. he >> you can sign up with a paper application and there's a separate contractor to do that. but they envision a specific amount of volume. if that volume really increases, problems ave some fixing these

to defend themselves. >> a lot of fun talking aboutthat.googlehadthe same capabilities, that is really cool. i do know you had new nuclear submarines and collections satellites but put that aside for the moment. don't underestimate your opponents please. don't underestimate your own capabilities to deal with those because they are not bound by our laws. the thing on the metrics point, ceos and c i os have different metrics. and not going to get a sale. the ceo's metric is it will make the company get more money and that is the angle you have to take so we're seeing ceos do this calculation of risk. does your board have a risk committee? most people say yes and the risk committee considers cyberrisks? the answer is global mix and that is one of the metric we can use to see how this is changing. different matter, this is a hard problem. >> support my colleague here. toss out a concern about the lens that is used, discussing this issue. and other activities of crime, spying but activities that are constant, in reality we are not going to eliminate. it will not disappear from other countri

, and with the riseofgoogleglass,we will always be on camera. so the supreme court will look extremely idiosyncratic to be the one place in which it's a camera freeze him. so i shut the chief justice's view that the court should give up with the times. i think that's and bravely going to happen and it's a question of the person i was on the court and who is comfortable and who is not. >> having watched you argue on the supreme court i don't think you have to worry about her foibles being broadcast on television. i can't remember any. this is one place where the court has backtracked, or to use judge starr term, our request have read -- begin with historic cases in 2000 s. of the presidential election between george bush and al gore, the court did start to release audio recordings of the oral arguments within an hour or so after the argument ended. in the terms that followed the court continued to do something similar with the audio releasing it with a high profile cases of the term and putting it up shortly after the arguments were over that same day. within two years ago there was a c

help a and one is driven by technology,privacygooglethosemore about you read in the federal government. do we care about that if the point is just to make sure what i want to buy? also the other is a little more complicated that technology plus the threat question in the old days when we were interested in the white-collar spies we could have search warrants we knew who they were coming for numbers, and now the threat is much more diffuse we need to do some traveling and how do we do that without violating people's privacy? that is a really big issue also the international dimension so we can work out arrangements with their allies and friends as well. so thank you all. the pied cast on wray and did work. >> the podcast on wray and did work. >> as nasa's future goes and if it is healthy then you don't need a program to convince people science and engineering is good to do because they will see it on paper. they will be called for engineers to help us go ice fishing and europa with water that has been liquid for billions of years. we will dig through the soils of mars to look

that was certainlyyahoo!,googlingwithand others are expressing right now information sharing with the government. i was talking to one of the people responsible for these. and i said, what is the legal thing you do? and he said we try to do it under title 10. if a problem we go it under title 50. we don't have a problem carrying out offensive operations nap said, there's no such thing as cyber deterrence. there are issues that congress needs to work on, most of them are domestic, but in term of our military capabilities, fortunately -- i'm not cynical about congress. i'm cynical about this congress. [laughter] in term of our military capabilities, the military is not waiting for happy words from capitol hill. >> leonard,ic you wanted to respond. and dan, i'll see if there's anything you would like to add to this discussion. >> i i have a brief point to make. which is a meta and on the policy level rather than legal. but i think when i say that signer is hard. having done it for awhile. ic one of the reasons why it's particularly hard -- i'm sitting in a room of highly educate people. everythings

communication links that connect yahoo!andgoogledatacenters around the world. under something called project muscular which allows the nsa and the british intelligence agency government communications headquarters, or gchq to copy data flows across fiber optic cables to carry information among the data centers of these silicon valley companies. could the panel please explain what the program is about and what impact it has on the programs that are the subject of today's hearing which is to 15 and 702 program? >> i can't address the veracity or lack there of, the details of the article but i think it's worthwhile making a few general points for everybody. even by the terms of the article itself, there's no connection to the 702 or 215 programs that we are here to discuss. i would suggest though that any implication would seem -- and the press coverage of this issue that nsa uses executive order 12333 to undermine our troubled that or get around the foreign intelligence surveillance act which is simply inaccurate. as the panel one oh and as a public should know, fisa is a statute that has part